Controller-equipped, Android-based system gives indies access to the TV.

Since the days of the great Atari crash, the history of game consoles has been one of increasingly powerful walled gardens. Massive companies exercise tight control over what games can be released on their platform, how often, and at what price. But that model is starting to look a little outdated. We live in a world where iOS is succeeding as a game platform with thousands of lightly regulated titles, where even hardcore games like Team Fortress 2 are making the free-to-play model work, and where PC developers often make more money when they control the price of their own games.

Those are the kinds of business developments that are motivating the team behind Ouya, a $99, Android 4.0-based TV game console project launching on Kickstarter today. Ouya is promising to provide a more open, hackable, and flexible gaming environment than the console market has ever seen before.

Ouya founder Julie Uhrman—who’s had executive experience at GameFly, IGN, and Vivendi Universal—thinks it's about time the console market learned from the success other platforms have seen recently by opening up. “It’s ironic, all the growth in gaming is moving to mobile platforms, [and] we’re seeing a lot of AAA developers leaving their console shops to go to mobile, yet three out of every four dollars is still spent in the living room, a majority of gaming time is still spent on the TV, and if you survey any gamer they’ll tell you their No. 1 platform is the TV.”

The increasing expense and complications of getting a game on to a console are forcing developers onto other platforms, Uhrman said. It's leading to a situation where the consoles are “stuck with sequel after sequel versus new created games and IP because it’s too expensive and no one wants to take a risk as something new. … We just think the time is really right. Nothing new came out of E3 [hardware-wise], and everybody’s feeling a little tired. It’s interesting because around the time of E3, everyone was asking if consoles were dead. We don’t think consoles are dead, we just think it’s time to rethink the way we do business.”

Hackable hardware

The proposed hardware specs for the Ouya are about what you’d expect for a console that comes in at less than $100. The system uses the same kind of quad-core NVIDIA Tegra 3 processor that powers the Google Nexus 7 and Microsoft’s Surface tablets, along with 1GB of RAM and 8GB of built-in storage. That’ll let the system easily run decently complex 3D games at 1080p, but graphically it won’t hold a candle to the Xbox 360 or PS3 (much less their successors, which are expected as soon as late 2013).

What Ouya lacks in raw power, it makes up for with its low price and an open design that seems perfect for hackers and hobbyists. Ouya owners will be able to open the casing with a standard screwdriver to upgrade everything from the RAM to the memory chips, and even to solder additions onto the motherboard itself using “clearly documented test points,” according to a fact sheet. Basic consumers won’t be expected to regularly upgrade the internals like PC gamers, however—Uhrman said developers can be confident in developing for “one chipset that will be totally standard.”

On the software side, every console will come pre-loaded with a free SDK, letting anyone familiar with Android development become a potential Ouya developer without paying any additional fees. The operating system on the Ouya is fully rootable, as well, meaning we’re sure to see a Linux distro for the box roughly five microseconds after it’s available in the wild.

But Uhrman said Android was a preferable option over an open source environment like Linux for one key reason. “Familiarity is key,” she said. “Any time you want to launch something new, you want to remove as many reservations and hurdles as possible... there’s always opportunity cost, and you want to give the best value proposition. I looked at what was out there, and Android is well accepted by hundreds of developers, it’s easy to understand it is not expensive to start developing on, and we’re starting to see a huge movement of developers to the mobile space... It’s something that they know; they’re not learning something new.”

Android roots don’t mean a completely touch-based interface, though. Ouya will include a standard wireless controller with two analog sticks, a d-pad, and eight action buttons, along with a 2-to-3-inch touchpad set in the middle to allow for gesture-based controls. The dual-use controller allows for the accuracy and responsiveness required for standard, joystick-and-button-based console games, Uhrman said. It will also serve as a bridge to let existing Android games be ported to the system easily. She even suggested that the unique controller could lead to new games that use both the touchpad and the standard buttons, which “won’t be available anywhere else” (though we think the Wii U’s tablet GamePad could probably handle them).

Software questions

Ouya’s Android architecture means most existing Android games and apps should work on the system with little to no modification. However, we imagine games designed for a 4-inch phone screen might need some graphical changes before being shown on an HDTV. Ouya owners won’t just be able to pluck any old app off the Google Play store, though—developers and customers will have to go through a proprietary Ouya store. This lets the company take a standard 30 percent fee from all content sold (the store will also provide an “extra layer of security” against piracy through online authentication, a representative told Ars). And while games will be the primary focus for the system, non-gaming apps will also be available on the store, including game-focused live video streaming service Twitch.TV.

The Ouya store will have a minimal approval process that allows a wide variety of titles, Uhrman said, but there will be one requirement that is non-negotiable: every game on Ouya will be free-to-play in some form. That might bring up visions of a system dominated by microtransactions and pay-to-win schemes, but Uhrman clarified that the “free-to-play” portion of an Ouya game could take any form a developer wants. An Ouya game could follow the popular PC and console demo model, for instance, offering a free feature or time-limited version gratis with the option to pay a one-time fee to unlock the full version. “Our only requirement is that the gamer have the opportunity to play some aspect of it for free,” Uhrman said. “We don’t like the idea that you pay $60 for a game and feel cheated. We want anybody to have the opportunity to try the game.”

A prototype menu screen provided by Ouya shows a rash of Android ports for the system. Oh, and Minecraft.

Precisely what games those Ouya owners will be trying at the system’s planned launch early next year is still a mystery. Uhrman wasn’t ready to confirm which titles or developers would be represented at the system’s planned launch early next year, but a press sheet accompanying the announcement listed supportive quotes from developers including Jordan Mechner (Prince of Persia), Jenova Chen (Flower, Flow), Adam Saltsman (Canabalt), and Markus “Notch” Persson (Minecraft). Images of a prototype menu system provided by Ouya also showed a prototype system with a menu highlighting Minecraft as an option, as well as titles with a more mobile heritage like Canabalt, Triple Town, Dead Trigger, and Shadowgun.

While it seems like Ouya won’t hurt for support from the indie and mobile sides of the industry, it remains to be seen whether the big-name, AAA console publishers will be willing to throw their weight behind an unproven new system (or whether a low-cost, hacker-friendly system can survive and thrive without them). Uhrman thinks the major publishers will come on board, though, because Ouya gives them easy access to an open digital distribution environment without the danger of lowering the value of their games. Unlike mobile phones and tablet platforms, she said, publishers will be able to sell downloadable titles on Ouya for $60, and “it’ll be accepted by gamers, because it’s a television-based game that’s leveraging a real controller and everything that comes along with it.”

Interplay founder Brian Fargo (Wasteland, A Bard’s Tale) told Ars he was skeptical of the idea behind Ouya when he first heard it pitched. But Fargo was convinced to become a minor investor in the project when the founders pointed out how well systems like the PlayStation 2 have continued to sell at the $99 price point. And while independent developers aren’t exactly hurting for opportunities to innovate on platforms like the PC and iOS, Fargo said he’s excited to see these developers get a crack at making games designed for the living room TV with a standard controller.

“I like to support anything that provides more opportunities for smaller developers,” Fargo told Ars. “No one company can compete with the crowd. This is, for the first time, giving the crowd a chance to see what they can do with a console television.”

Promoted Comments

One of the major problems with the traditional consoles is that they're in a rut. There's very little real innovation, just the same old games rehashed with new levels and better graphics.

Which, when you look at the cost of a console and the games themselves, is fairly bad value for money. A few hundred for the console? Sixty for the game? For a few hours of playtime?

The smart move being made here is to recognise that low-priced games with simple controls and graphics have sold like hot cakes in the wider (mostly mobile) market. The machine doesn't need to be powerful to engross you for hours into a game. The game itself doesn't need to be complex, only compelling.

So, if they get multiplayer and the interface right, this might work quite well - it's basically almost a perfect platform for indie game developers and studios.

I don't expect to see AAA titles on this. But then, most AAA titles are rehashes of rehashes, and there's a big market out there that doesn't believe they're worth the money anyway. Bear in mind that market doesn't move in "gaming circles", which is why some won't believe it exists.

But the Wii sold well despite the gaming circles panning its inability to handle 2189065123967 polygons per femtosecond and run Grand Theft Battlefield Turismo Episode 7465 (Part 5).

So if you think this can't possibly succeed because the existing consoles "crush it", I have news - you're not the target market.

Me, I just might be the target market. I'm certainly interested to see what they do.

216 posts | registered Oct 31, 2004

Kyle Orland
Kyle is the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica, specializing in video game hardware and software. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He is based in the Washington, DC area. Emailkyle.orland@arstechnica.com//Twitter@KyleOrl

What Ouya lacks in raw power, it makes up for with its low price and an open design that seems perfect for hackers and hobbyists.

As a hobbyist this makes me happy. As a gamer... a little less so. I've always felt the biggest selling point for consoles is that they just work. In the sense that hardware is fairly static, minor board tweaks aside, which in turn allows developers to track down hardware related bugs a little fast. Being a PC gamer mostly I know, and fear, the pain of a weird graphics glitch that might require several hours of driver rollbacks and testing.

I'm pretty excited to see how this turns out. Release day games will be important because $99 is a lot to spend on a system that may or may not be well supported by developers. If they have a good inital showing then it could pick up momentum. The biggest problem I see is that gamers who use consoles I think are pretty happy with what they got in the big name systems and aren't looking for much more. But perhaps the Ouya could bring over PC gamers who stayed away from consoles in the past because they didn't like the environment created by the big name systems.

"But Fargo was convinced to become a minor investor in the project when the founders pointed out how well systems like the PlayStation 2 have continued to sell at the $99 price point."

Except the PlayStation 2 has this huge library of excellent games, if you can find any copies. People are probably buying them when they learn they can't play PS2 games on their PS3. I had no money to purchase a PS2 until early 2009 and it was $129 then.

If this had a Steam logo on the front of it, I would be all over it. Without that, this is just another in a long line of short-lived challengers for the living room. Indie games need the platforms that the big studio games create.

What Ouya lacks in raw power, it makes up for with its low price and an open design that seems perfect for hackers and hobbyists.

As a hobbyist this makes me happy. As a gamer... a little less so. I've always felt the biggest selling point for consoles is that they just work. In the sense that hardware is fairly static, minor board tweaks aside, which in turn allows developers to track down hardware related bugs a little fast. Being a PC gamer mostly I know, and fear, the pain of a weird graphics glitch that might require several hours of driver rollbacks and testing.

But you dont have to update, developers will be making games with the minimum in mind and you can run them better if you want to. That seems like the smartest move here, 'here is where you can start and this will always work....but, you can add all this and make it better if that is what you are looking for.'

One of the major problems with the traditional consoles is that they're in a rut. There's very little real innovation, just the same old games rehashed with new levels and better graphics.

Which, when you look at the cost of a console and the games themselves, is fairly bad value for money. A few hundred for the console? Sixty for the game? For a few hours of playtime?

The smart move being made here is to recognise that low-priced games with simple controls and graphics have sold like hot cakes in the wider (mostly mobile) market. The machine doesn't need to be powerful to engross you for hours into a game. The game itself doesn't need to be complex, only compelling.

So, if they get multiplayer and the interface right, this might work quite well - it's basically almost a perfect platform for indie game developers and studios.

I don't expect to see AAA titles on this. But then, most AAA titles are rehashes of rehashes, and there's a big market out there that doesn't believe they're worth the money anyway. Bear in mind that market doesn't move in "gaming circles", which is why some won't believe it exists.

But the Wii sold well despite the gaming circles panning its inability to handle 2189065123967 polygons per femtosecond and run Grand Theft Battlefield Turismo Episode 7465 (Part 5).

So if you think this can't possibly succeed because the existing consoles "crush it", I have news - you're not the target market.

Me, I just might be the target market. I'm certainly interested to see what they do.

Seems like a very nice middle ground option for devs and PC/console gamers who aren't really ready for the other side. I for one am interested to a degree. I built a PC and trying to hold off on a GPU for as long as I can as close to assassins creed 3 launch. This console generation somewhat disappointed me so I'm taking the risk to switch over. I hope Ouyu beats expectations and lures some quality over.

If you are an AAA game dev or publisher, what do you do with this platform? It's app store style, so you might expect prices will race to a low level. It's behind PS3 & 360 in power, so you'd need an entire set of assets for it (which turns into a specific cost for this platform) - and Wii assets might do, but who is still making Wii games?

I think what you do is what you do with all platforms you are not sure about - you wait to see if the install base gets big enough to warrant a punt. And that's a vicious circle, of course.

If it runs XBMC better than an AppleTV, without having to do a jailbreak headache, I'm sold.

The reason simple, mobile (phone), games are doing so well is that there is a lot of times when people are away from home and need a distraction/kill time etc. while waiting in an office, bus, plane, etc. When I'm at home, in my living room, on the big screen I have MUCH better entertainment and gaming options available to me then mobile game ports. If I want to play phone games at home...I'll use my phone.

So it is using Android 4.0. You can play all the game on your android phone but with a bigger screen. I can see some interactive gaming between the console and your android phone like Wii U setup. This might seem attractive to hobbyist. As a gamer, not so much. Expecting tons of low quality game with few good ones. This is good place for indie developer to start.

A low-powered console seems to defeat the whole purpose of console gaming. I play games on my TV that my handheld things (tablet or PSP/etc) can't handle, whether it's due to graphics, complexity or something else.

Paying $60 for something that will run just fine on my tablet, where even $10 games are pushing the upper bound of what people are willing to pay, isn't going to fly with the vast majority of gamers.

And making things worse, now you're stuck playing it in the living room.

Major kudos to them for trying something different, but I just cannot see them getting enough traction to make this financially worthwhile. And if by some miracle they *do* turn this into a viable platform, the hackers they've worked so hard to court will bust open the copy protection and that's it for profits.

If the platform is truly open and I can use it to do what the Nexus Q SHOULD have done (install any Android software I choose, including media playback software that let's me play back my own locally stored content) then I could see this being quite the popular item among the crowd that wants an open living room media playback device with good casual gaming capability.

Skyrim rang, it was gonna dance all over your argument (but then it took an arrow in the knee).

I'mn sure there are exceptions - I've not played Skyrim though, so haven't a clue what you're on about...

But in terms of value for money, the millions of people who've bought Angry Birds and played it to death are definitely ahead of those who spent five to ten times that price for a slasher that gave a few hours at best.

The market has been improving over time on this point, especially with the use of multiplayer and MMORPG type titles which deliver greatly extended gameplay - however, a sticking point with that is the population of the games. The game I play most is TF2, and even there you sometimes get servers with obnoxious scrotes who haven't yet learnt that screaming insults and being a douche isn't the correct way to play the game.

There's an entire market of older men out there who watch war movies, read war stories, and would probably like to play war games. Yet they're ignored by the industry. Perhaps because we know they'll lose interest and go do something else once they see what most of the other players are like?

Quote:

For hobbyists who want a TV-ready ARM box with decent GPU search for "Raspberry Pi"

Which has less RAM, no standard OS, no support for developers, no store, and no wireless networking.

I wish the Raspberry Pi luck, and am sure it will dominate the hobbyist sector. But the Ouya seems aimed more at those that bought a Wii, or have games on their phone.

Standard wireless controller with two analog sticks, a d-pad, and eight action buttons,

If that's it, that's not standard. Lack of triggers will be the death of it. It might as well be missing an analogue stick.Edit: or maybe four of those eight buttons are triggers. In which case nevermind.

Which, when you look at the cost of a console and the games themselves, is fairly bad value for money. A few hundred for the console? Sixty for the game? For a few hours of playtime?

People have been buying DVD and BluRay players for hundreds of dollars and then buying discs for $10-$30 for a mere 2 hours of content each. For the price, expensive $60 games are a much better value than that offering 10 to hundreds of hours of entertainment (depending on the game). So your argument there is very weak.

As far as this console goes, I wouldn't invest. Consoles require far too much support (software updates, hardware replacements, etc) and these guys already sealed their fate by allowing people to open up the console and play around with the insides without voiding the warranty. That's just bad business practice. These guys have their heads up their asses.

Also, those color-based buttons on the controller alienate the color blind -- yet another detail that these guys failed to account for.

It's simply a bad investment, but they'll appeal to people's hopes and dreams at first.

People have been buying DVD and BluRay players for hundreds of dollars and then buying discs for $10-$30 for a mere 2 hours of content each. For the price, expensive $60 games are a much better value than that offering 10 to hundreds of hours of entertainment (depending on the game). So your argument there is very weak.

Agreed. Besides that, who pays $60 for their typical game purchase? Half the new games seem to come out for $50, and two months later they're $30-40 and can be had used for $25. Some games I'll happily pay full price for on day one, but I don't do that with most game purchases because I don't have to.

Yep. The walled garden, as far as user modding and updates, is why I have a console and not a PC. The worst thing about PC gaming was that the word "PC" only meant that it ran x86 instructions, and determining if a game would run well was always half the decision on buying it.

I like the idea of removing the walled garden for game developers. The console should be a standard thing to code for and everyone should be encouraged to code for it for a minimal cost, including home tinkerers. They should have access to all that the system does, including the newer multimedia center stuff.

This will not be even close to how cool my Phantom is! Wait, it can play cell phone and tablet games, can it do side talkin?What can I get in a used headless PC for 99$? Will that PC also be upgradable?So if 100 people contribute to the kick start how many devs will runs to make games for those 100 people?

How is this supposed to challenge convention when it essentially can't compete with current (old) hardware? This sounds more like it would compete with Arcade game titles, which are already much cheaper than the $60 discs. As it is now, many game titles don't make great use of modern hardware very well because the title also has to run on current consoles too. This would only make that situation worse. .

The PS2 selling at $99 is a poor idea to base a selling point off of. I and a lot of you guys probably did too paid $300+ for their first PS2 and that had the entire PS one and growing PS2 catalog. I want to know why they made the hardware specs so skimpy to basically hang with devices that are already available down the street at best buy? Why don't they up the ante a little bit yes it might drive price up a little but the console will have a fighting chance to last more than a year. They are competing with consoles that were developed a almost a decade ago. If rumors hold true 360 is on its way out in the next year and PS3 i'm sure will be soon to follow. I'm a little frustrated because this could be very cool but with such modest hardware I don't see it lasting at all outside a group of hobbyists

They are going to have a very hard time meeting their target. The vast majority of the money needed is slated to come from dev kits under their system and the more expensive items. Unless they're planning on opening up more consoles during the kickstarter, I don't see how they'll make it... Already now the $95 console option is over half gone and they've barely raised 10%

A low-powered console seems to defeat the whole purpose of console gaming. I play games on my TV that my handheld things (tablet or PSP/etc) can't handle, whether it's due to graphics, complexity or something else.

Paying $60 for something that will run just fine on my tablet, where even $10 games are pushing the upper bound of what people are willing to pay, isn't going to fly with the vast majority of gamers.

And making things worse, now you're stuck playing it in the living room.

Major kudos to them for trying something different, but I just cannot see them getting enough traction to make this financially worthwhile. And if by some miracle they *do* turn this into a viable platform, the hackers they've worked so hard to court will bust open the copy protection and that's it for profits.

You're overlooking something. With prices set by developers competing, not publishers colluding, you won't pay 60$ for a game. Oh, someone might make something that expensive, but I'd expect most the offerings to be in the 5$ to 20$ range.It's NOT a AAA gaming machine. I'd expect it to look a great deal like steam with pricing. You'll see prices all over the map. Remember, without spending 30M$ on graphics, game design gets a great deal cheaper to make.

As far as them dirty pirates and their hacking of copy protections, the losses to piracy are minor at best. If I'm not paying for the game, I'm not a lost sale. I was never going to buy it in the first place, or you wouldn't sell it to me. I think I had my pirated copy of Total Ahnihilation for almost ten years before someone would sell me a legitimate copy <3 Greatest. RTS. Ever. Infact, I think i'm going to go load that game up and play it when I get home from work today.

Piracy is almost costless to developers, being mostly a matter of pride. The biggest costs involved are probably the attempts to prevent it. I understand it's annoying to see someone take your work for free, but it's not the industry crushing menace it's made out to be. With just the simplist of copy protections, most consumers willing to pay money won't bother circumventing them.

Another thought (maybe already been said):I love my PS3 cause I can use a motion controller with a Sharpshooter rifle to play a 3D-glasses shooter that has a campaign, and a co-op mode, and competitive MP (SOCOM 4 in this case). Or I don't have to use the battle rifle, I can use the Move controller; or a regular controller. Or I could play a game with a steering wheel peripheral; I can play in persistent worlds (DCUO, Dust 514); could play DDR on a dancemat; and I can earn trophies while playing these (I like trophies for some reason). So there's a lot of variety and capabilities I can do with the system. I'm assuming there's these capabilities because Sony works with (pays) developers to incorporate these features and experiences; and Sony can do that because they're established as a console company and has developed the online network, install base, etc.

But this system - I don't see it being as diverse. So I don't see this being a direct competitor - like the other guy said, its really a different market (well maybe a competitor to Nintendo's offerings, I could see that happening).

As a pc-gamer, I don't own a tv. It's not that owning a pc prevents me from having a console, but that being a pc-gamer, consoles just aren't attractive. The only games that make a console attractive are those rare exclusives or imports and fighting games (which are the only genre I think plays better on a console than a pc).

Does this deliver either of those? No, it just offers the same of what I already have on my pc at lower quality and with more hassle.

Quote:

Skyrim rang, it was gonna dance all over your argument (but then it took an arrow in the knee).

To use the metaphor of an old friend, playing an Elder Scrolls game on a console is like eating a candy bar without removing the wrapper.

This will not be even close to how cool my Phantom is! Wait, it can play cell phone and tablet games, can it do side talkin?What can I get in a used headless PC for 99$? Will that PC also be upgradable?So if 100 people contribute to the kick start how many devs will runs to make games for those 100 people?

It is using Android 4.0 platform. You won't have shortage of games. All the existing android games can run on it. The only thing developers need to do is add in controller support. Maybe scale the graphic for bigger screen if they believe it can return some profit for the time invested. Some games already have decent graphics. I hope they redesign the controller a bit. What's up with this all colored circle like buttons? I don't want to remember the color of my buttons. I am having hard time remember Playstation button already (yep, I know, but I don't play PS that much. I still have to look at my controller sometime for those quick time events after while ). Just use the traditional AB/XY setup.

I've been playing Dungeon Defenders on my Galaxy Note and my neck is getting a cramp from peering down on this 5.3" screen. Playing this on a 50" TV instead would work quite nicely ... and if it came with a touch screen controller, game developers wouldn't even need to add support for a different controller.

I do see a niche for this product -- cheap console with a ton of free-to-play games. Sure you can get all of these games already on your $500 smartphone but $100 is quite a lot cheaper for those still stuck with older phones.

The smart move being made here is to recognise that low-priced games with simple controls and graphics have sold like hot cakes in the wider (mostly mobile) market. The machine doesn't need to be powerful to engross you for hours into a game. The game itself doesn't need to be complex, only compelling.

I don't expect to see AAA titles on this. But then, most AAA titles are rehashes of rehashes, and there's a big market out there that doesn't believe they're worth the money anyway. Bear in mind that market doesn't move in "gaming circles", which is why some won't believe it exists.

But the Wii sold well despite the gaming circles panning its inability to handle 2189065123967 polygons per femtosecond and run Grand Theft Battlefield Turismo Episode 7465 (Part 5).

A gaming platform is more than the sum of its hardware, as you observe with the Wii. All sorts of factors enter in to it, like distribution deals and how creators or studios are compensated. The number of buyers who might be interested in your title on that platform. It remains to be seen if this is the sort of platform that will attract the sort of innovative/creative content you mention, or if those talents will aim for more established platforms with dedicate gamers, which I take it you are not.

I have to wonder whether the incentive or profit potential will really be here, and whether or not there will be some meaningful editorial control of the content quality available.. Or, if, like a mobile device marketplace, e.g.: google play, it will be a wasteland of 95% crap.

Finally, while the raw specs of the hardware are certainly capable of sustaining an entertaining gaming experience, will it have the kinds of low controller-to-screen latencies needed for a proper video gaming experience?

It sounds like they're running head-long into Microsoft's plan for gaming.

Currently, the 360 has three channels for games. Their DVD-based titles, their Live Arcade games for smaller games and smaller devs that still want access to Achievements and the like, and their Indie channel, that to my knowledge, isn't curated. Combine that with the Windows Phone marketplace that splits between officially blessed Live Games and an open marketplace for all other games, and what looks like a planned split of the same style for Windows 8.

So MS is already creating a relatively uncurated console experience to live beside its highly curated console experience.

I'm not saying the Ouya is doomed, but I will say it's got an uphill battle.

Here's what this box needs to be - a console for SNES style games at 1080p full hd that run on Android. With these current specs, I do worry a bit about if the console can actually do it with any sort of quick rendering.